E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSSQueen Elizabeth II spent the first day of her Diamond Jubilee Weekend at the races in Epsom, England, a tradition older than Kentucky Derby. NBC's Michelle Kosinski reports.
LONDON -- A thousand boats on the River Thames -- the biggest water-borne celebration for more than 350 years -- and hundreds of thousands of loyal subjects lining the river banks to watch a floating belfry carrying huge bronze bells, followed by a Royal Barge bearing the monarch and her closest family. This is the showpiece of Sunday's celebrations to mark Queen Elizabeth's Diamond Jubilee.
Up and down the land, roads are closed off so people outside the capital can join the festivities -- almost 10,000 street parties were organized. The four-day holiday will go unnoticed by no one. This is a national celebration of monarchy; after all only one other British royal has reached this landmark -- Queen Victoria in 1897.
Amid all this pageantry and partying one voice is straining to be heard: that of the Republican movement, which believes this is all utter nonsense.
"What are we celebrating? A singularly undistinguished family's hold on the nation, a mirage of nationhood, a majestic delusion," writes journalist Polly Toynbee, a member of Republic, an organization campaigning for the abolition of the monarchy.
Vying with the teaming crowds of royal enthusiasts, the group organized a demonstration beside the River Thames at London's Tower Bridge. There supporters will attempt to make their point to the Queen and other members of her family as they glide past in the Royal Barge.
There might be four days of celebrations in Great Britain for the Queen's Diamond Jubilee, but some Londoners still have to work. NBC's Duncan Golestani finds a quick way to join in the fun.
"We are speaking out for the millions who oppose the monarchy," Republic's campaign manager Graham Smith told NBC News. "This is not something to celebrate. We have an unelected head of state who has been here for sixty years."
Are the Republicans merely party-poopers or do they represent an important segment of public opinion?
Republic claims support for their movement is increasing rapidly. Smith says the group had 7,000 volunteers supporting their work when Prince William's wedding to Kate Middleton was announced in 2010. Eighteen months later that number has risen to 25,000, he says.
But opinion polls suggest the Republican movement has so far not won popular support. A recent poll conducted by Populus found 82 percent want to stick with the monarchy and keep the Queen as head of state. Whichever way you look at it, that is a resounding majority.
But Republic is optimistic. "This (diamond jubilee) is good for our movement. The jubilee celebrations will soon be forgotten but more people will have had an opportunity to think about the role of the monarchy in our society," Smith believes. "The monarchy is expensive, unaccountable and a drag on our democratic process ... a broken institution."
Britain is in a dark place economically and the government's austerity measures are hurting many. So these lavish celebrations in honor of a figurehead who leads a life of luxury way beyond the reach of her subjects are at odds with the downbeat national spirit.
Which should, perhaps, make this fertile ground for a Republican movement keen to recruit those who find the contrast unpalatable.
It is, however, far more likely that four days of glitter and pageantry are, for most Britons, a welcome period of escapism -- meaning that the Republicans call for change will, over this weekend at least, not be heard above the clamorous support for the monarchy.
But the Republicans will not be disheartened -- they know they are playing a long game.
More world news from msnbc.com and NBC News:
- Anger as Egypt's ex-ruler Mubarak gets life in prison, not death
- In Cairo, cheers and fears over Mubarak sentencing
- NATO rescues doctors kidnapped by Taliban in 'extraordinarily brave' operation
- Mourning the loss of more lives in Syria
- Regaining moral high ground? Google tells Chinese when they're being censored
- Myanmar's Suu Kyi warns against 'reckless optimism'
Follow us on Twitter: @msnbc_world
Leave a Comment:
I assume they'll be taking advantage of the extra bank holiday. The Queen has no political power, she makes us far more money than we give her in taxes and it's not as if she sits on her arse all day and does nothing. It's worked for us for over a thousand years and it doesn't look like the monarchy is going away anytime soon.
What irony - In England the Monarchy is irrelevant; in the U.S. the Republicans are irrelevant.
One musn't imagine -- for even a moment -- that the Queen has "no political power." She exercizes great influence over individual members of Parliament, and over the financial and industrial leadership of the UK, Europe, and the US. Her wealth and her power are enormous.
America doesn't have a monarchy, granted, but there still seems to be a disproportionate obsession with shiny objects: glitz, pomp, celebrities and their excessive wealth! Maybe it's a secret obsession, for some Americans more than others? A yearning for the simpler days when peasants worried about the queen bearing a 'heir'!? Or when the prince would come and pick the simple maiden? The widespread believing in 'trickle-down-economics', tax-cuts for the super-rich, celebrities and their kids, and what the Kardashians and Paris Hilton are wearing... sad really, all that silly fawning like obsequious underlings for the faux royalty.
Maybe (some) people need a daily delusion: a 'moral' book heavily edited by an English, medieval king giving us ALL THE ANSWERS... In the daily grind, clinging to the faint hope of winning the lottery or being a star on American idol or knowing one (from OUR state), gets us through the starkness of reality!?
The British at least have one somewhat dignified institution that caters to the human need to fawn and awe of pomp and glitz. We in America however have a never-ending circus of competing 'royalty', global village idiots and cocky court-jesters and we assume those from 'old money' know what they are doing, even if these 'crusaders' enriched themselves at the expense of thousands of 'peasants' at the companies they raided...
Amazing really, how 'conservatives' in this country once were LOYALISTS and those wanting independence from abuse and fought AGAINST 'inequality' were considered 'revolutionaries'...
Ronald,
Funny, I was just thinking the same about the Democrats. Useless and have done nothing but spend our money and put us further into debt.
Unline the Republicans, who start trillion dollar was and cut taxes to pay for them. Good call, Tbenton. Good call!
No one said that Republicanism has popular support. Graham Smith, stated that membership had increased substantially since the imposition of the absurd costly royal wedding. Membership is growing week on week and I think that once a certain figure is reached - almost certainly in 2013, the organisation will be a force to be reckoned with. Last year I donated £100- to the cause, which I imagine is about average.
Tourism is the number one driver in the British economy. The Monarchy is the number one driver behind tourists going to there. Sums it all up quite nicely.
Just think - if that king granted 13 seats in the house of commons to the colonies, we could be a part of the celebration, too!
Too bad the king was mentally ill and, because of that, too stubborn to do the right thing. The rest was history.
Think that history worked out just as it was supposed to. Allthough I do wonder if Dan Snyder could have been created Duke of Maryland and Jerry Jones Earl of Dallas if they would've still bothered to have bought pro football teams.
So you are saying that the Queen and all are mere Tourist Attractions.
That the Queen is a profitable Tourist Attraction - I wouldn' tell her that.
Ian - I could be wrong but I thought the financial industry was Britains's economic engine; I don't know anyone who goes to ENgland to seee the Queeen.
Maybe not to see the queen personally, no, but to see all the trappings of monarchy? Yeah, they do.
Tourism in Britain has very, very little to do with the monarchy or the royals. It is a myth.
Just like the Repubs in the US! They continually work to demonize anything that could become a scapegoat for the economic catastrophe that their fossilized so-called conservative ideology created in most western economies.
In America they are puppets for corporate and big money interests, while goosing social conservative to vote against their own economic concerns by making political chew toys through a weird mix of willful ignorance and groups they've been trained to 'hate'. This including unionized workers, government employees, public school teachers, pensioners, poor and immigrant working folk, gays and lesbians, and anyone possessing a college degree from a university that can actually allow for an objective opinion from data known as facts. In turn, they've been also coached to support the most loathsome of our wealthiest citizens for their so-called success, even though quite a few of them made that wealth through destroying companies, communities, and pieces of our environment or doing nothing more than flipping paper money for quick profits without any benefit.
We have the added indignity here of an entire wing of conservative media who is allowed to spew outright lies through various channels without so much as an opposing filter. They are then supported by a rigid conservative wing of our Supreme Court who has shown ideological fealty to nothing short of a conservative junta, and at times, warping beyond all perspective our constitution to support the power and economic base of the most powerful and wealthy.
If you care about the future of the UK, you should do everything possible to limit their power. Conservatives here have become the Frankenstein of politics in the US that may very well destroy this government and our society in their quest for power and dominance of their bizarre ideology.
I think you are talking about OBUMO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! JP
Why don't you mention how the Spanish Republicans were the worst of history, too, since they worked against Franco? Oh, wait, that was a good thing, right? You're really a fine "Democrat", backing monarchy solely because those who oppose it are styled as "Republicans". Guess that you hate Canadians and Australians who oppose the continuation of the monarchy, too, since they are obstensibly "Republicans"? Wow, do you use more than six brain cells? Do you have more than that?
AKRandy,
Classy, how do you ever expect anyone to take you seriously? Facts with reliable source is the way, not broad brush comments e.g. 'Bush ruined our economy' period.
Now that is what is called Off Topic. American Republicans have nothing at all in common with the English Republicans. Theirs want to abolish the monarchy and get rid of the inherited classes, while our Republicans are working to establish an inherited aristocracy! Please be real!
JPArch, always try to remember to take your pills each morning. That way, you won't be quite as delusional.
Republicans in the UK are Anti-Monarchists, and overwhelmingly would be Democrats here in the US, since many of them tend to be what we call liberals (and a large number of them, if the posts on The Guardian newspaper's website are Socialists).
As our grandparents said, better to be quiet and let people think you're a fool than to open your mouth and remove all doubt. With that being said, you should read up on the British Republican movement before posting an opinion - you'll look less foolish if you did.
From: ercillor.blogspot.com
TO THE QUEEN
In 1814 your soldiers came
And set our capitol all aflame.
.....................................................
----------------------------------------
Now 1814 pales
In the light of your reign.
Won't you please send your soldiers
To do it again?
Well I think we found a winner for ignorant post of the day. Perhaps OP should learn the difference between the Republican party and a Republican philosophy. The two are entirely and completely unrelated. In fact, the American REPUBLICAN PARTY are allegedly the bastions of conservativism and by the very definition of conservativism, that is the protection of the status quo, those in Britain who oppose the monarchy are in fact anti-conservatives as they want to do away with the status quo. In that regard it may be said that American Republican party members and British Republican philosophists are opposites; that is not entirely true though as believing in the Republican philosophy means nothing about political positions other than a belief in the abolition of monarchy. To that end it is fitting to call the French revolutionaries Republicans, as well as the Russian communists.
The royal family kind of reminds me of the family we have in the white house right now. We are in the midst of the worst economic down slide since the great depression and we have the first lady taking the countries jets to Europe for lobster and a shopping trip. We have the president take more vacations then I have ever seen, and then to put it to us lets have Hollywood come out to lavish parties and spend millions of our tax payers money to host these parties. And you dare to blame it on the Republicans? Tell me when the democrats can produce a budget, or better yet when the president can produce a budget that is not so ridiculous that even his most staunch democratic supporters run for the hills rather then support him. We need a change in November from a president and family that ignores the will of the people and instead thinks they are royalty. Anyone but Democrats in November!
Tbenton.. you need to learn how to think for yourself and stop spouting your Rush Limbaugh Tea Bagger garbage. If you want to point out the real royalty in this country just look at Romney who has made his fortune sacking and raping american businesses and then blaming their failure on unions and unsound business practices. Wake Up!
in the U.K. they only have a few royalty that get money and a life most only dream about here
in America we have all of our elected officals that such so much more mmoney and a life most only dream about
Actually, there are all kinds and sorts of U.K. "royalty" who seemingly do little. Most of our pols work for less, other than what they can arrange for in "consultancies" when they step down or get voted out, except, of course, for the ones who are "on the take" while in office. Interestingly, Transparency International ranks the U.S. ahead of the U.K. for honest governance, although of course both are well behind the Scandanavian countries.
The Queen and the members of the Royal Family work hard. I would encourage the British Republicans, each and every one, to work as hard for the country as Queen Elizabeth. She represents her country and its history to the World at large. She and the immediate Royal Family have a schedule of public functions within the country and around the world that would leave most CEOs and corporate executives exhausted and wanting more pay, bonuses and perks. While the Queen my be seen as being exceedingly wealthy, much of what surrounds her belongs to the British People (artworks, palaces, etc.). Prince Phillip, his sons and grandsons, have served the country (or are serving presently) in the military. People such as these republicans are too quick to want to write off the monarchy whose history goes back over a millennium instead of looking at it in awe, that there are institutions that represent continuity from the Dark Ages to the present day and learn from that history. Long live the Queen and congratulations on 60 years on the throne!
Wow just one lone voice:( how sad.
I'm amazed at the American fascination towards royalty, especially British royalty. I'm further amazed by Britain and the Commonwealth's continued support of the British monarchy. I get the tourist attraction side things for England (not so much for Great Britain) but, to keep a dysfunctional inbreed family as any sort of a figurehead? Amazing. Oh, I admit Princess Di raised the level of the gene pool, but, look where that got her. Poor thing.
I spend a lot of time on the Guardian and Telegraph comment pages. While many British republicans advocate having an elected Head of State, they don't have much reason for it except disliking The Windsors.
In my view, there are many more reasons for Britain to keep the Monarchy rather than have an Elected Head of State, mainly that it would be another politician with a mandate and a propensity to increase his/her office's budget and upset the current political settlement in the UK - that the Parliament is supreme, and the House of Commons is superior to all other institutions within the Kingdom, which would make the UK's (perceived to be non-functioning) political system more frictional and less functioning, just like our American system.
As far as our fascination with the Windsors, I think it's more to do with 1) Royal pageantry is an unusual occurrence for us (most of us don't know that Canada, the Bahamas, Barbados, Antigua and Barbuda, and Australia are countries she is Queen of); and 2) having a non-political Head of State, in comparison to our system where the Presidential candidates have to raise obscene amounts of money to get elected and then spend time promising us legislative actions that don't happen and end up warring with Congress, seems not to be a bad idea.
You say you are amazed at the fasination of the royal family in the UK. I am amazed at the adoration of the so called celebs in the USA. to the point they can get away with anything,Before you talk about the money the monarky makes ,then check the pay checks of the so called celebs.
Just another example of human rulership. The pros and especially the cons.
Proposing "theocracy" as an alternative, George? Or "anarchy"? Perhaps rule by space aliens?
Britain is already a theocracy as well as monarchy. Elizabeth is head of state of Britain in addition to being head of the Anglican church.
Dan, while she is styled as "Defender of the Faith" amongst many, many other things (my personal favourite being "Lord of Man"), one originally granted, ironically, by the Pope to a young Henry VIII and one Prince Charles has indicated a desire to alter when/if he accedes to the throne as the idea of "the Faith" being obsolete in the twenty-first century, do you think that she runs the Anglican Church any more than she runs the country? Britain has hardly been a "theocracy" for the last 200 years since Catholics were granted full civil rights, and certainly not sense the nominally Anglican Jew Disraeli was PM for Queen Victoria in the late nineteenth century.
Why are they protesting to the Queen directly? She can't help that she was born a royal. They should be protesting Parliment, not ruining her special day.
Sure she can, she can take the crown off her head and walk away. In fact there is not one person more capable of abolishing the monarchy than the monarch.
Why would she do that when 82% of the population prefer her to stay?
The civil list (the amount of money paid to the royal family by taxpayers) cost each person in the UK around $2.15 per year. About half a cup of coffee. After 60 years on the throne, she has an 82% approval rating. I can't think of any other person on the face of the earth that enjoys that kind of respect.
I'm an American and I whole heartedly support the monarchy. It is tradition and history that hold a country together, not capitalism and free markets. Take away the stability of the monarchy and all it stands for and you become us, a nation of strip malls and stupid teenagers, with no sense of tradition, history or respect for the elderly and the sacrifices laid down by generations before. In a time when we can't seem to settle upon anyone to lead this country for more than 4 years at a time, the British can look to a woman who as stood by God and Country for 60 years. There is a great lesson to be learned from Elizabeth II, one sorely lacking in my country and in this current generation.
Have you BEEN to Britain?
LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL.....Britain is a dump and has been for decades. The Queen doesn't rule the nation. Most of her power is ceremonial. While she does have some influence and tons of money, she has no direct control over policy and as such, she and the royal family exist to create the illusion of tradition. I don't say get rid of the queen. I say give complete control of the Britain and the United States back to the Royals. They couldn't do a 'worse' job. Once they fix us up, we can have another revolution.
Ironic that post came from someone called USEYOURBRAIN. Sorry to burst your bubble brainiac but Britain is exactly the same culturally as us. They have the strip malls, they have the homeless, the junkies, the racial tension. Maybe you should travel there before you start making assumptions. About the only difference between us and them is the accents.
I must say though, your post is particularly loathsome coming from an American. Come on man where is your dignity? Do you walk around on all fours all day or do you just fantasize about being a dog?
What happens in the UK happens to the US 20 yrs later. So yes they are similar in a lot of way's.
And immigration is causing many problems within the UK, so watch out USA.
The House of Windsor is a sham even by monarchist standards. House of What? Oh that's right, named themselves after an innocuous castle they own to avoid being first the House of Saxe-Coburg-Gotha and then the House of Battenburg (that's Mountbatten in it's original German). A family of Germans in kilts pretending to be Scots.
Her Majesty has survived by doing and saying nothing of significance. She is the model Head of State. And she staved of the republicans for her lifetime by agreeing to pay taxes.
But what will happen when her dysfunctional progeny are crowned? In Germany they could ditch their embarassing figurehead President, as he serves at the behest of the Bundestag. What do you do with a moron as Head of State for Life?
The easiest compromise would be an Act of Parliament to allow the removal of the King or Queen by Parliament. God knows among all those cousins they can find one with some dignity and a modicum of self control!
Another reform would be what they do in the Thai monarchy: prince to commoner in three generations. Cuts back the deadwood dramatically!
Apparently millions of Britons are hoping and praying that either the Queen at some point, or failing that Charles upon her demise, will abdicate in favor of a grandson. Perhaps the latter -- the Queen is going nowhere, at least until her reign is longer than that of her great-great grandmother.
They wear kilts to try and erase the memory that they, nor their ancestors back to William of Orange are not the the legitimate royal family. In fact Prince William would be the first semi-legitimate monarch in over 300 years and that is because his mother, Diana, is a descendant of Charles I.
Okay you guys! Here's the thing about the British Monarchy. There has NEVER been an English King or Queen. There has been French (William the conqueror). There has been Welsh (the Tudors). There has been Scottish (James I, son of Mary Queen of Scots). And of course the Germans/Greek (The Windsors which the Greek part comes from Prince Phillip, the Queen's husband). It is true that Prince William has more English blood in him, because of his mother, Princess Diana. The last time the English has ruled themselves was prior to the Romans and the Saxons when there were individual clans/kingdoms on the main island, the Anglos.
I know that's completely off topic, but I thought I point historical fact. For on topic, Queen Elizabeth II is one of the better Monarchs. She's been dedicated to her job before she even took the throne. She's seen and brought the UK through a lot of horrible trials. I have a lot of respect for her and her family, because at the end of the day (as the Windsors have said), they are just a normal family when they aren't in public.
Alfred the Great comes to mind, as does Edward the Confessor and Harold. Prior to 1066, there were actual English monarchs, Guilliame le Conquerant (William the Conqueror) was a "Norman Frenchman" whose ancestors had only arrived in Brittany (right across the Channel in northern France) about a century earlier and the "Normans" (North-men) were of Scandanavian origin not hugely removed from the Angles and Saxons; of course even true French were Franks, originally a Germanic tribe which had conquered Gaul but were separated from the Germanic brothers by the adoption of a Romance (Roman-ish) language, which the other Germans never did, but so many French loan-words entered English due to the Norman French influence that English (Angle-ish) is now almost as much a Romance language as a Germanic one.
Royalty is a dying breed, just like the dinasaurs.
I bet the Queen can spell dinosaurs.
Not without wearing ridiculous white gloves to avoid touching a pen that was made by mere commoners.
Please come get your British journalist's and talking heads that have taking American jobs with the networks.
Have we any over there as part of some sort of "exchange programme"?
Typical liberal misleading headline.
Like it or not, we now have an American Monarchy. Those who are born into MONEY, such as Willard Romney, are our "monarchy," otherwise known as the 1%. They have their fingers in enough pies in this country; let's at least keep them out of the White House.
Bad news buddy, they are already in the WH. Obama is not any better than Romney nor does he represent different interests than Romney. People who vote for either of the two factions are the problem, not one or the other.
are you crazy? Romney earned the money he has, it was NOT inherited!
Yeah his dad was an auto worker...no, come to think of it, he was a multi-millionaire.
Get real. Bain Capital is to entrepreneurial capitalism as gambling is to building, or as locust is to farming.
George arranged for Mitt to have an education most of us could only dream of, and of course he had great connections due to his father's political and business connections, but many others have failed miserably in one field or another with a similar background (cf. GWB's rocky business start). George Romney didn't give Mitt tons of money, he used his managment skills to make his own. It's senseless to think that he didn't have many advantages, but he did use them quite well, far moreso than many others coming from a similar place.
Taxes certainly would be less, and the "people" would be the "rulers", if the archaic idea of a monarchy was finally dissipated.
But the government would end up having to pay the Royals MORE for the land that they are presently allowed to use rent free. Unless they wanted to also steal from an old woman whom they took her identity and job away...
The republicans are deluded if they think representation can be just. An arbitrary leader is better than none.
This woman the Queen was determined to go down in history in a big way. And she did it. If you are going to do it - might as well do it right and do it big.
I love that the people who complain the most can't spell...lololol.....anyway, well done Queen Elizabeth....you have been Queen all my life as I was born in 53 so hurrah for you!! They work hard for the country...a lot harder than some folks work for our country....before you start throwing out the monarchy, you should check to see how many jobs depend on the Queen and her family being around.
Suckerfish, you don't know what you are talking about.
Not that I know or care much for Brit politics since we have huge concerns of our own, but I've heard some statements that sum it all up quite nicely. That folks are willfully ignorant about how hanging onto antiquated government will not benefit them simply because it allows an escapism for a short time seems to be pandemic. Anybody know the story of "Grandma's Turkey" ???? LMAO
How I would love to see all of her hats and how big the room is where they are stored and how they are displayed and who chooses which outfit and etc.,etc.,etc.,etc. I'm assuming the hat makers give her the hats. Who knows???????? Wonder if she wears the same one twice?
Never thought I'd ever be saying this, but YOU GO REPUBLICANS!
But do not think for a moment your voice will be heard. To many people (just not the poor and middle class) make ALOT of easy money off of the Inbred Royalty.
Most of my life I've thought I'd be proud(er) of my British ancestry if the country became a republic. Now, however, I would not want to deny the exquisite Kate Middleton her hopes of becoming queen.
My own "hopes" have to do with the thought that you must be joking...
Nice to know we're not the only country with idiot Republicans